Check out this December 5th Newsweek Poll (PDF).
But how long is it gonna be until the Mormon church makes good on its statements made
during the Prop 8 campaign that it "does not object to rights for same-sex couples" and is not "anti-gay" ??
Utah currently does not have any statewideNot anti-gay? Yeah, right.
laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation
or gender identity. However, in Utah’s largest, most
equality-minded city and capitol, Salt Lake City, there once
was a city ordinance on the books that prevented public
employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
Sadly, the ordinance was on the City’s book for less than a
month.
From late December 1997 to mid-January 1998, Salt
Lake City protected employees from discrimination based on
their sexual orientation; but the Salt Lake City Council
repealed the ordinance less than a month after its passage.
The Salt Lake City Weekly newspaper even went so far as to
call the short life of the ordinance and its eventual repeal “an
outcome of Mormon politics” because of the documented urgings
of Latter-Day Saint Church Leaders for their followers to
attend the Salt Lake City Council meeting and urge for the
ordinance’s immediate repeal.
No More Excuses: Making the Case for Equal Employment Laws in Utah (PDF)
Posts
7 comments:
Very interesting numbers, Chino.
55% against gay marriage.
55% support civil unions.
In other words, 55% are textbook Yes on Prop 8 voters.
And, of course, as we both know, there is a certain cushion which emerges for the Prop 8 side of the issue, once the inner sanctum of the voting booth is brought into the equation.
I figure if there were a national referendum, gay marriage would lose by about 20%.
And I am impressed that the same percentage would likely approve civil unions.
Hard to call that bigotry, I'd say.
Folks just know what marriage is and isn't.
Have you guys stopped to consider that you are fighting the wrong war here?
Maybe Sir Elton John has it right after all, eh?
Rick,
Did you bother to note the % that support hospital visitation rights, inheritance rights, etc.? Interestingly enough, substantially more Americans support recognizing those rights than support either marriage equality or civil unions. What that suggests to me is that quite a few folks have yet to make the connection between recognizing same-sex unions and protecting the rights of gay Americans. Somehow, there seems to be this notion that we don't need the former in order to achieve the latter, and I'd lay much of the blame for that on folks like you who work so diligently to obfuscate the issue.
Case in point re obfuscation: your Elton John comment. Are you sincerely suggesting that you agree with Elton that the UK system works fine? Because if we had the system in place in the US that Elton enjoys in the UK, I'd have precious little to complain about.
Why, Chino, speaking of obfuscation......we might want to file your above comment under "The Pot Calling The Kettle Black" :-)
In California, civil unions enjoy *every* protection available under California law to married couples.
That, by the way, means *every*, as in, "without exception".
Therefore, your comments about Elton John are particularly obfuscatory, since nothing in Prop 8 could possibly have possibly affected Federal laws one way or the other, as you well knew before composing your exercise in obfuscation above.
Prop 8 took not a single right away from any one.
Because this truth was impossible for the obfuscatory tactics of the No on 8 campaign to muddy-up, we won.
And again, you guys fought the wrong war, on the wrong ground, against the wrong foe.
Now you compound the colossal blunder by showing yourselves to be even more intolerant, mean-spirited, anti-religious, and contemptuous of the democratic outcome than our worst fears would have allowed us to imagine.
If you think this is progress, then all I can say is thank the good Lord my side doesn't think with its hormones.
Rick,
Are you seriously suggesting that the folks who took away marriage equality in California are not the same folks who work to deny equal rights to gay Americans in other states and on the Federal level?
C'mon, you know better than that. All you're doing here is crafting a plausible-sounding argument to sell to folks who've got no clue what the backers of the Yes on 8 campaign have been up to outside California.
So, not surprisingly, you didn't even bother to answer my question about Elton John. You brought up his comment, I asked you to clarify your take on his comment, and you chose to ignore my question. I'll ask it again:
Are you sincerely suggesting that you agree with Elton that the UK system works fine?
I'm all ears.
I agree with Elton John that the effort to shove gay "marriage" down the throats of the people of California was a colossal mistake for everyone, most of all for the gays, but also for all the rest of us, who have witnessed a Dow Jones-like plummeting of the charity and good will that we all need to maintain for one another, even those with whom we disagree.
While I cannot claim any particular familiarity with the differences, if any, between California's civil union law (civil unions enjoy *all* the rights and responsibilities of marriage) and the laws in force in the UK, I can say once again:
Elton John has it exactly right, insofar as the gay "marriage" gambit is concerned.
Gay "marriage" is a stone cold, twice-dead LOSER. It will not advance the legitimate rights of the gays one iota (quite to the contrary), and it will foster- IS FOSTERING, I fear- the Mother of All Backlashes if this colossally stupid strategy is doggedly ridden right over the cliff.
You might yet be able to salvage some of your important agenda items in the ultimate resolution of the question of same sex relationships, but you are running out of time and goodwill faster than I think you have any idea.
I don't think with my hormones, chino, and I suggest you guys stop doing so.
Rick,
If you don't know the difference between Elton's situation (his civil union is recognized as equal to marriage by all levels of the UK government) and the situation in the US, then we have little left to discuss. Argue your position as strenuously as you like, but if you're going to plead ignorance when pressed to answer simple questions, that suggests to me that I'm wasting my time here.
In any case, your "don't think with your hormones" advice speaks for itself.
By the way, as a deep thinker, did you even bother to read the informative article that I linked to regarding employment law in Utah?
Heh heh heh.
Chino, my friend, you have a real future in politics.
You know how to, as they stay, "stay on message". :-)
Well, I'll drop in from time to time..... Try to summon up a little compassion for your enemies, it causes justice to rain down from the heavens.
All the best,
Your friend,
Rick
Post a Comment